external image

Paula Deen Witch Hunt

I come from farming families. Your livestock is a valuable resource. You feed them well to get best production. You treat them well, not only because there are laws, but because you have moral beliefs, and you get better results. You call the vet or treat them when they are ill, because they are costly to replace.

You breed them to produce superior offspring. You sell or trade these as you see fit.

You might bring the dogs in the house at night and feed them from your own table. You reward their loyalty with kindness.

There are animal cruelty charges laid every year, regardless. I'll be quick to agree these are a minority.

Slaves were not people, they were livestock.
 
You want to be careful what you take from surveys and interviews. Surveys are only as good as the questions they ask and the people who take them and interviews can be hand picked.

There's a phenomenon called Stockholm Syndrome where kidnap victims bond with their captors. It's actually quite common and many long term kidnap victims learn to care for their captors. They empathize with them and even defend them when they're eventually set free.
You are right, thank you for pointing this out; I often try to find an angle of view different from the "official" or widely accepted one but in this instance I forgot to take this into account.

And I completely agree with your post - and actually that was part of what I was trying to say - that the attitude is the root of the evil. And I was trying to express my opinion that it is not a problem of racism or slavery per se, IMO, it is a wider problem of a group of people superior in some way and taking advantage of this at the expense of another group of people. It is the same story with Native Americans. And it is the same story all over the world today... The strong trying to subjugate or impose on the weaker...
Also, IMO one of the problems of racism stems from the fact that it is not widely recognised that races IMO are not the same! They are equal in human terms, yes, they are all human beings, but they are not the same - in terms of physical and mental talents, physical and mental predispositions... And the human society has developed to the point that it is widely recognised that the diversity represented by races is a great thing. But in practical terms, nobody knows what to do with this in societies consisting of members of different ethnic groups and races. In my country both Communist and post-Communist governments, have been trying to fit Gypsies into their local Central European templates... Of course, the result is disastrous...
 
I stand by my statement , the world is full of crazy people who do not care what they say and show little respect for their fellow human beings , it is sad but true, it is all around us and it is hard to tune it out while it plays in our music and everyday life events , that was what I was trying to state in my" General Statement".

I have always been proud to be from the south and yes we have had our share of racism but this is all over the world my friend , watch the world news , it is going on all around this globe not only in the south.

Laurie

I think the South has had WAY more than its "fair share" of racism, and from what I read and hear, much of it still exists simmering under the surface, which is not surprising given that these racist attitudes were/are passed down through the generations.

Just because it exists in other places too does not make it OK.

I have spent significant time in the deep south, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia. Racism is far more spread in these parts. Actually racism is still such a way of life that I am not sure that some people in these areas know exactly what racism is, they just understand that people are not created equal. Lots of people are still pissed that the south lost, and had their rights to slavery taken away.

The south really opened my eyes to the fact that racism is real. Of course being brought up I knew it was real, but of course the south was always the main demographic area when learning about racism. When I first got to spend time in the south the racism was so apparent that my first observation was "all the history books and lesson taught were real."
 
You are right, thank you for pointing this out; I often try to find an angle of view different from the "official" or widely accepted one but in this instance I forgot to take this into account.

And I completely agree with your post - and actually that was part of what I was trying to say - that the attitude is the root of the evil. And I was trying to express my opinion that it is not a problem of racism or slavery per se, IMO, it is a wider problem of a group of people superior in some way and taking advantage of this at the expense of another group of people. It is the same story with Native Americans. And it is the same story all over the world today... The strong trying to subjugate or impose on the weaker...
Also, IMO one of the problems of racism stems from the fact that it is not widely recognised that races IMO are not the same! They are equal in human terms, yes, they are all human beings, but they are not the same - in terms of physical and mental talents, physical and mental predispositions... And the human society has developed to the point that it is widely recognised that the diversity represented by races is a great thing. But in practical terms, nobody knows what to do with this in societies consisting of members of different ethnic groups and races. In my country both Communist and post-Communist governments, have been trying to fit Gypsies into their local Central European templates... Of course, the result is disastrous...

Don't mistake racial differences from cultural differences. Try telling Jet li, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Usain Bolt, Albert Einstein, Mahatma Gandhi, Jaromir Jagr, Neils Bhor, Muhammad Ali, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Martin Luther King Jr (and trust me, I could go on and on) that their race makes them inferior mentally or physically. Any race is capable of producing brilliant minds and outstanding athletes. Any culture is not. There are religious, political social and economical problems that many cultures face (just to name a few) that keep people who are born into these cultures from reaching their full potential. And many cultures are quite happy with their economic status and level of technological advancements. Go visit an Amish village and ask if they're in any great hurry to send someone to the moon or if you can borrow their cell phone.

It's true that some nations are in dire need of assistance and welcome any they can get but we can't hold the world up to our standards because not everyone measures the quality of life with the same set of scales. It doesn't make them inferior, it just makes them different. Personally, I like different. The last thing we need is more people like me around. ;)
 
Don't mistake racial differences from cultural differences. Try telling Jet li, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Usain Bolt, Albert Einstein, Mahatma Gandhi, Jaromir Jagr, Neils Bhor, Muhammad Ali, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Martin Luther King Jr (and trust me, I could go on and on) that their race makes them inferior mentally or physically. Any race is capable of producing brilliant minds and outstanding athletes. Any culture is not. There are religious, political social and economical problems that many cultures face (just to name a few) that keep people who are born into these cultures from reaching their full potential. And many cultures are quite happy with their economic status and level of technological advancements. Go visit an Amish village and ask if they're in any great hurry to send someone to the moon or if you can borrow their cell phone.

It's true that some nations are in dire need of assistance and welcome any they can get but we can't hold the world up to our standards because not everyone measures the quality of life with the same set of scales. It doesn't make them inferior, it just makes them different. Personally, I like different. The last thing we need is more people like me around. ;)

+1

Excellent post skiny.
 
A person who uses a racial slur in the privacy of their own home is still a racist.

Ok, but who gives a rat's ass? What are you going to do? Kill her? Send her to jail? It's none of your business if she's racist at home.

She sure doesn't act like a racist in public though, she's hiring tons of black people in her restaurant. Her bodyguard (the guy who follows her everywhere) is also black. I wouldn't want a black man around me at all time and put my life in his hands if I were racist, would you? Black people around her also appear to love her and claim that she respects them a lot.

People like you make racism witch hunting much worse than racism itself.
 
Ok, but who gives a rat's ass?

Not nearly enough people, apparently.

What are you going to do? Kill her? Send her to jail? It's none of your business if she's racist at home.

No, it's not but it is the business of her sponsors.

She sure doesn't act like a racist in public though,

Most pedophiles, serial killers and rapists don't either.

she's hiring tons of black people in her restaurant. Her bodyguard (the guy who follows her everywhere) is also black. I wouldn't want a black man around me at all time and put my life in his hands if I were racist, would you? Black people around her also appear to love her and claim that she respects them a lot.

You can believe a race is inferior and still have them provide services for you and respect is relative. Does she respect them as much as she respects people of her own race or do they feel more respected by her than by other racists? Or would they just like to keep their jobs so their not going to run around in public calling her a racist?

And if you think a people are not racist because they've hired some black people or have a few black friends you don't really understand racism.

People like you make racism witch hunting much worse than racism itself.

Believe what you like but I don't believe being offended by people who make racist statements worse than racism itself.
 
I remember reading somewhere about a survey carried out still in the 20th century among very old African American people who actually experienced the era of slavery in the south; there were roughly 1,000 respondents in that survey, IIRC. A surprisingly huge percentage of them (regrettably, I do not remember the exact figure) reminisced about the era of slavery as very good old times. They said their white masters took care of them, gave them work, housing, food, even some education, health care, etc. Also, black nannies were taking care of the white children, so the two races became interpersonally intertwined. The respondents went on to say that after slavery was abolished, they were on their own; I am paraphrasing but I recall the impression of something like being thrown out to the cold world without having the resources of the white masters behind them (of course it was the system's result that the black people mostly probably had no capital at all to start their own businesses, etc.).

So I think I understand what she was trying to say - that the southerners knew that black people were fine because they lived with them every day side by side. While others from the north might be paradoxically more prejudiced because they did not have any personal experience with them and might have been afraid of them as of unknown, different, strange, enigmatic people...

The impression I got from the survey was that it was a symbiotic relationship in the south, not always fraught with cruelty, inhuman treatment, etc. Also, I think it is fair to say that the white race at that time was undeniably more advanced technologically and intellectually.
But of course I agree with you, skiny, that slavery was and is unacceptable. And I think it was despicable that white people took advantage of their technological superiority and abused the black people the way they did.

All I am trying to say is that - no pun intended - it is not a completely black-and-white matter; it is more complex.
Look at Zimbabwe - the country fared much better with white people in charge; it prospered, etc. After they drove most white people away, some time after that the country was on the brink of famine IIRC... Once again, the problem I think was that white people, in general, abused their superiorty and were trampling on the natives so the natives were rightfully angered... These cases can be found all over the globe in other more subtle versions... We Czechs have to thank Germans for a lot from culture and technology and advancement in the last few centuries... But many Czechs refuse to recognise this because it came at a price - the Germans were oppressive in the border areas (I mean long before WWII) and, speaking in somewhat naive terms, were sometimes not behaving nicely... etc., etc. :)

The sample was biased.

These very old ex slaves were the ones that did NOT die young due to overwork and mistreatment, so of course their replies would paint a rosy picture of live as a slave.

What is far more telling is what they experienced when slavery ended. Despite being almost "part of the family", they were kicked out onto the streets. What was wrong with simply converting them to paid employees to carry out the same tasks as before. I would presume that after the ex slaves were "released", others were then employed to take their place and carry out the ex slaves' tasks as paid employees.

They were always "livestock" to even the good masters, and when the economics changed, and the current "livestock" suddenly became more expensive to keep, it was got rid of and replaced by a different "crop".

The TRULY good masters would have been those that simply told their slaves that they were now employees, and would be paid the going rate for what they did, and were free to leave to seek employment elsewhere if they didn't want to stay on. The ones that left should then have been given a starter package so that they could at least leave with dignity.
 
Im prejudiced...I make conscious and subconscious choices and decisions based on preferences. What I am not, is racist. Im sorry but any person whether publically or privately, decides that a people on the whole are better or less than, are people i chose neither to form friendships with or know. You can say whatever the frick you'd like in your home..but if i hear such things or are aware of such things, i don't really want to know you
 
Some of the stuff said is this thread is pretty sad. I as an African American find it retarded that someone would mention any survey about x amount of former slaves saying how good of a time it was. The fact remains thousands were hung, thousands were lynched, thousands were raped. Yay for the few that didn't get harmed, and walked away with nice memories.

But the thread isn't about slavery how good or bad it was.

In terms of Paula, I wasn't there to hear how anything was said. I have no clue how the former employee heard about something she supposedly only said in her home 27 years ago, or how anyone would have heard about it if it was said between husband and wife 27 years ago. It's everyone's choice how they want to handle this. If I thought my bottom line would be damaged in anyway by this I would like to think my moral code would hold strong, but the sad truth is I'd probably drop her too. As a company it's their choice and right to protect their money, just like I'm sure there will be x amount of people not buying any of her products.

Which hunt. No not really (imo), nobody is trying to put her in jail. It's in the media, as are a million other stories, some of which they beat us to death with. She's a public figure, naturally this type of incident wouldn't happen behind closed doors. I wonder if it would be better if the companies were dropping her but it wasn't in the news media? Would it then cease to be a witch hunt? As I said it's peoples / companies choice to support her or not. They aren't best friends, it's a business. Bad business, maybe, still business.
 
One of the reasons racism still exists is that people seem to believe there are such things as justified racism or situational racism. "If someone pulled a gun on me I would denigrate his entire race" as if every black person in existence is to blame for the offense. A person who uses a racial slur in the privacy of their own home is still a racist. The fact that they've learned they can't do this in public changes nothing. People don't stop being racists just because they've left the house and they don't start being racists once they get home and close the door.

It seems ludicrous to sit here trying to think of scenarios when it's acceptable to be a racist. Even if you live in the inner cities where the population of immigrants is dense and crimes perpetrated by black or ethnic groups is high, that's still not a race problem. If it was middle and upper class black or ethnic people would be perpetrating the same crimes and these crimes wouldn't be perpetrated by white people. It's an economic and social problem and adding racism to the mix only makes it worse.

Personally, I think the woman is a racist even if she was nice to some of her black staff.

She told a story in an interview about how rough it was for one of her ancestors after the civil war because he lost his 30 something slaves. "He didn't know how to deal with life with no one to help operate his plantation."

They weren't helping. They were slaves.

She continued by saying "I feel like the south is almost less prejudice because black folks played such an integral part in our lives. They were like our family."

They weren't your family. They were a race of people with no rights being bought and sold like cattle and being forced to work in chains.

Just because your ancestors had slaves doesn't make you a racist. But if you want me to believe you're not, stop acting like it was ok to own people regardless of where or when it happened.

The bolded quote by Skiny says it all. She did this to herself. She needs to STFU if she wants to save even a sliver of her reputation. She has complete diarrhea of the mouth. She has made herself out to be a racist by her own words.
 
Some of the stuff said is this thread is pretty sad. I as an African American find it retarded that someone would mention any survey about x amount of former slaves saying how good of a time it was. The fact remains thousands were hung, thousands were lynched, thousands were raped. Yay for the few that didn't get harmed, and walked away with nice memories.

But the thread isn't about slavery how good or bad it was.

In terms of Paula, I wasn't there to hear how anything was said. I have no clue how the former employee heard about something she supposedly only said in her home 27 years ago, or how anyone would have heard about it if it was said between husband and wife 27 years ago. It's everyone's choice how they want to handle this. If I thought my bottom line would be damaged in anyway by this I would like to think my moral code would hold strong, but the sad truth is I'd probably drop her too. As a company it's their choice and right to protect their money, just like I'm sure there will be x amount of people not buying any of her products.

Which hunt. No not really (imo), nobody is trying to put her in jail. It's in the media, as are a million other stories, some of which they beat us to death with. She's a public figure, naturally this type of incident wouldn't happen behind closed doors. I wonder if it would be better if the companies were dropping her but it wasn't in the news media? Would it then cease to be a witch hunt? As I said it's peoples / companies choice to support her or not. They aren't best friends, it's a business. Bad business, maybe, still business.

Being a racist isn't a crime. There's no way we can monitor and convict people for what they think or what they feel. Acting on these feelings is a different story entirely. Personally, I don't think it's a bad thing when we see people lose friends, lose their jobs, lose advertising sponsors and so on because they acted in a racist manner. People need to see that this behaviour will not be tolerated. As far as I know you can't be convicted of an offence for calling someone a racist name but if someone manages to prove she showed prejudice against any of her employees on the basis of race, that most certainly is illegal.
 
Being a racist isn't a crime. There's no way we can monitor and convict people for what they think or what they feel. Acting on these feelings is a different story entirely. Personally, I don't think it's a bad thing when we see people lose friends, lose their jobs, lose advertising sponsors and so on because they acted in a racist manner. People need to see that this behaviour will not be tolerated. As far as I know you can't be convicted of an offence for calling someone a racist name but if someone manages to prove she showed prejudice against any of her employees on the basis of race, that most certainly is illegal.

You can here in the UK.

If you mug someone and at the same time call them racist names you can be charged with a "racially aggravated" offence, and if convicted, would receive a stiffer sentence than if you had kept your mouth shut whilst robbing them.

If you hurl racist abuse at someone, the same applies, and any fine is greater than if you had just launched a tirade of bog standard non racist abuse.
 
You can here in the UK.

If you mug someone and at the same time call them racist names you can be charged with a "racially aggravated" offence, and if convicted, would receive a stiffer sentence than if you had kept your mouth shut whilst robbing them.

If you hurl racist abuse at someone, the same applies, and any fine is greater than if you had just launched a tirade of bog standard non racist abuse.

Mind you the UK is a little strange in some respects, a person from England can call someone from Wales very horrible things about their choice of lifetime partners (did I hear the noise of a lamb in the distance then?) and it’s just a joke and conversely a person from Wales may fly their nations flag with complete impunity whilst their neighbours in England would be frowned upon for their flag fluttering in the wind as tantamount to national racism.

The same rules apply to the subjects in the South of England that consider people from the North as somewhat inferior and then we can move onto Scotland with the same issues.

I would suggest that people from the UK are not really qualified to comment and with the past influx of people from the eastern part of the Eurozone that have settled here for a few years complaining to the natively born about immigration it becomes a fallacy.

Where do you draw the line between overt and conjecture?
 
Being a racist isn't a crime. There's no way we can monitor and convict people for what they think or what they feel. Acting on these feelings is a different story entirely. Personally, I don't think it's a bad thing when we see people lose friends, lose their jobs, lose advertising sponsors and so on because they acted in a racist manner. People need to see that this behaviour will not be tolerated. As far as I know you can't be convicted of an offence for calling someone a racist name but if someone manages to prove she showed prejudice against any of her employees on the basis of race, that most certainly is illegal.

I was referencing the witch hunt statement. I also didn't say I wanted her jailed for this either, as she didn't commit a criminal offense. Not sure why you quoted me.

But for the record when commenting a crime against a person, if the crime was done because of victim's race then that charge can be upgraded to the next level and prosecuted as a hate crime. So yes we do prosecute racism.
 
Freedom Of Speech is one thing, but putting hatred of another race is another, if acted upon in violence then it is a crime.

Unfortunately, I was held up in Kingston, NY in traffic, as the KKK had a parade. No one could stop it, police were there but just to make sure there were no violent outbursts.

It sucks so bad when some hurl racist comments and all we can do is back away...unless it's in a work place...go figure.
 
Mind you the UK is a little strange in some respects, a person from England can call someone from Wales very horrible things about their choice of lifetime partners (did I hear the noise of a lamb in the distance then?) and it’s just a joke and conversely a person from Wales may fly their nations flag with complete impunity whilst their neighbours in England would be frowned upon for their flag fluttering in the wind as tantamount to national racism.

The same rules apply to the subjects in the South of England that consider people from the North as somewhat inferior and then we can move onto Scotland with the same issues.

I would suggest that people from the UK are not really qualified to comment and with the past influx of people from the eastern part of the Eurozone that have settled here for a few years complaining to the natively born about immigration it becomes a fallacy.

Where do you draw the line between overt and conjecture?


I remember looking on FB and seeing some of the raciest things being said about the Muslims that butchered the young British soldier and other things involving immigrants that are rioting in parts of Europe now, so where is the line drawn ?

As I stated earlier it is all over the world and not just in the good ole USA , things are said in the heat of the moment or like mob mentality at its worst.

I will still buy her products as she told the truth and if we all said I am sorry for any bad name we have ever called, thought or muttered under our breath , there would be a thundering of" I'm Sorry all around the world ", no one is perfect on this earth.

Laurie
 
You can here in the UK.

If you mug someone and at the same time call them racist names you can be charged with a "racially aggravated" offence, and if convicted, would receive a stiffer sentence than if you had kept your mouth shut whilst robbing them.

If you hurl racist abuse at someone, the same applies, and any fine is greater than if you had just launched a tirade of bog standard non racist abuse.

Yes, once you verbally express it the story changes. I really just meant being a racist isn't a crime in itself. You just can't act on it and in a lot of situations that includes being verbal.

I was referencing the witch hunt statement. I also didn't say I wanted her jailed for this either, as she didn't commit a criminal offense. Not sure why you quoted me.

But for the record when commenting a crime against a person, if the crime was done because of victim's race then that charge can be upgraded to the next level and prosecuted as a hate crime. So yes we do prosecute racism.

Sorry, I was too lazy to chop it up this time. I was just commenting on you wondering if it would have been better if the companies dropped her but it wasn't in the media. I think it's better that people see the result of this type of behaviour.
 


I remember looking on FB and seeing some of the raciest things being said about the Muslims that butchered the young British soldier and other things involving immigrants that are rioting in parts of Europe now, so where is the line drawn ?

As I stated earlier it is all over the world and not just in the good ole USA , things are said in the heat of the moment or like mob mentality at its worst.

I will still buy her products as she told the truth and if we all said I am sorry for any bad name we have ever called, thought or muttered under our breath , there would be a thundering of" I'm Sorry all around the world ", no one is perfect on this earth.

Laurie

I don't think anyone is saying anybody is perfect or hasn't thought or said bad things. The main point is being prepared to suffer the consequences should those things be made public. Just as it's ok for you to continue purchasing her products, it's ok for others to stop purchasing them, and companies to stop selling them. I think that's called freedom :eek2:.

Truth be told if she would come to my house and cook me a meal, I would eat it in a flap jack minute. Still won't buy her products though.


I was referencing the witch hunt statement. I also didn't say I wanted her jailed for this either, as she didn't commit a criminal offense. Not sure why you quoted me.

But for the record when commenting a crime against a person, if the crime was done because of victim's race then that charge can be upgraded to the next level and prosecuted as a hate crime. So yes we do prosecute racism.

Ok my mistake, I understand now. :o
 
Thank you, that is a very good point. I feel stupid for not realising this fact... :(

I don't think you're stupid. I think the people who gave these interviews should have done more research and been more honest about the reality of this era. I've watched thousands of documentaries on a wide range of topics and the information in these things is only as good as the research put into them and the agenda the film makers start out with.

A little skepticism isn't a bad thing.
 
So two bullies walk down the street and they meet an unknown Asian and an unknown fat guy. The first bully, without warning, punches the fat guy in the face and calls him a "f'in fatass". The second bully punches the Asian guy in the face and calls him a "f'in chink". Both get arrested and the second guy gets a longer sentence for hate crime? How does that make any sense from the fat guy point of view?
 
So two bullies walk down the street and they meet an unknown Asian and an unknown fat guy. The first bully, without warning, punches the fat guy in the face and calls him a "f'in fatass". The second bully punches the Asian guy in the face and calls him a "f'in chink". Both get arrested and the second guy gets a longer sentence for hate crime? How does that make any sense from the fat guy point of view?

SIMPLE
The Asian can't do anything about who he is Obviously, the fat guy can
 
SIMPLE
The Asian can't do anything about who he is Obviously, the fat guy can

I see.
So the punch in the face is justified in one case and not in the other?

Let me tell you something, if some random guy passing by punches me or a loved one in the face, I want him to rot in jail for as long as possible. I don't give a shit about his "justification" or his "reason" behind it. Assault is assault. "Why" he did it is friggin' irrelevant. He punched an innocent person in the face, period.
 
So two bullies walk down the street and they meet an unknown Asian and an unknown fat guy. The first bully, without warning, punches the fat guy in the face and calls him a "f'in fatass". The second bully punches the Asian guy in the face and calls him a "f'in chink". Both get arrested and the second guy gets a longer sentence for hate crime? How does that make any sense from the fat guy point of view?

When you choose a victim based on bias / prejudice against their disability, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, national origin / ancestry, race, or color, that crime can be prosecuted as a hate crime.

I'm not well read on requirements / standards to upgrade a crime penalty in relation to hate crimes. But with the right police officer pushing, and a helpful A.D.A. (first line that accepts a charge), you would be able to charge both with hate crimes. The D.A. will then likely call you and ask if you really want to go forward with the case, or what lead you to believe its a hate crime. Articulation in your report will become extremely important, so that "f'in fatass" comment would need to be documented in the report. Then any past history of aggression towards people overweight will also come into play. You would also have to argue him being overweight is a disability, and I'm sure you can find case history or medical documentation supporting that.

The law is funny, and can be bent and twist all kinds of ways. A well worded argument can do wonders in court, as there are so many codes be it penal or otherwise that you can find a charge for someone. Hell you can be arrested for not using your turn signal, to change lanes. If that can be articulated, this case (the scenario you gave) would be easy.
 
I have been trying to find more info about Lisa Jackson, The lady who brought this suit.

She worked at Bubbas' not Paula Deens', although Bubbas' IS under the Deen umbrella.

"""She Has Substantial History With the Deen Empire:

Jackson worked as the general manager Deen and Hiers' Savannah restaurant Uncle Bubba's Seafood and Oyster House for five years. She quit in August 2010, alleging that she left under the advisement of her physician because of panic attacks and other stress-related health conditions she suffered while working at the Georgia eatery. """

BUT, according to Deen testimony, she left their employ shortly after an idea she had to turn Bubbas' into a buffet was rejected by the Deen family.
---------------------------


""""She Is White:

Jackson insists her lawsuit against the TV personality "has never been about the N-word." In a statement issued to CNN via her attorney, she explained that the suit "is to address Ms. Deen's patterns of disrespect and degradation of people that she deems to be inferior."
"I may be a white woman, but I could no longer tolerate her abuse of power as a business owner, nor her condonation [sic] of Mr. Hiers' (Deen's brother, Bubba Hiers, is also named in the suit) despicable behavior on a day-to-day basis," she added."""""

From what I have read, Bubba is a real piece of work. HE seems to be the most offending person in the suit, but Deen is getting most of the heat.

Also, if the conditions at their restaurants were as bad as she states, how could she stay as long as she did? As a manager, surely she has a very good resume that would attract plenty of other employment opportunities.

---------------------------------

""""She Claims There Was Also Sexual Harassment in the Working Environment:

The focus now is clearly on the racial controversy stirred up by Jackson's filing, but she also claimed that Hiers made sexually inappropriate comments to her, distributed inappropriate pictures to employees and watched pornography in the office. """""""


This again is about her brother, Bubba. Also, these things happened at Bubbas' not Paulas'.

Again, I have to ask, how can a person who is "so distraught" by these working conditions stay for 5+ years?

-----------------------------------------
 
So two bullies walk down the street and they meet an unknown Asian and an unknown fat guy. The first bully, without warning, punches the fat guy in the face and calls him a "f'in fatass". The second bully punches the Asian guy in the face and calls him a "f'in chink". Both get arrested and the second guy gets a longer sentence for hate crime? How does that make any sense from the fat guy point of view?

Ok, well first of all we're assuming both bullies punched the victims in the face because one was Asian and the other was fat. In Ottawa (where I live) the definition of a hate crime is as follows.

A criminal offence committed against a person or property which is motivated by hate/bias or prejudice based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or any other similar factor. (Obviously much the same as Cleveland's)

So if you assaulted someone strictly because they were fat then yes, that would most likely be considered a hate crime under the "any other similar factor" category even if the obesity was not considered a disability. Hate crimes for reasons such as race or sexual orientation are much easier to define.

I'm really not sure why you seem to be trying so hard to defend racist behaviour. To think that people are discriminated against simply because their skin is a different colour is not only completely illogical but is simply appalling. What is your motivation to find circumstances where this behaviour is justified?

Again, I have to ask, how can a person who is "so distraught" by these working conditions stay for 5+ years?

Since when is not quitting your job even though you hate it a new thing? Not everyone can walk off their job and find another one with equal pay or benefits within a reasonable distance from their home, spouse's place of employment, children's school and so on. This planet is covered with people who despise going to work every day but still go in and punch their card.

Many abusive people get away with this behaviour for years before someone finally comes forward. It's like asking why an abused spouse hangs around for years or why it takes 30 years for an abused child to report a coach or priest.
 
I'm really not sure why you seem to be trying so hard to defend racist behaviour. To think that people are discriminated against simply because their skin is a different colour is not only completely illogical but is simply appalling. What is your motivation to find circumstances where this behaviour is justified?

In my mind you should punish the crime for what it is, regardless of the motivation. It's not worse to get stabbed because you're black or gay than getting stabbed because they want to steal your wallet. The pizza guy who got stabbed for $20 isn't less of a victim than the black guy who got stabbed because he's black, is he? Unless you really believe that one is worse than the other?

Having different classes of victims for the same crime is absolutely disgraceful.
 
I disagree to a point

In my mind you should punish the crime for what it is, regardless of the motivation. It's not worse to get stabbed because you're black or gay than getting stabbed because they want to steal your wallet. The pizza guy who got stabbed for $20 isn't less of a victim than the black guy who got stabbed because he's black, is he? Unless you really believe than one is worse than the other?

Having different classes of victims for the same crime is absolutely disgraceful.


There is an additional level of harm in my opinion if someone is a crime victim "solely" because of a factor that is inherent in them. The pizza guy who got stabbed to get his $20 isn't under constant threat for being a pizza guy when he's not working. A black person is always a black person and therefore always under threat from those who would target people based on race.
I think that justifies additional societal sanctions for that sort of motivation.
 
The pizza guy who got stabbed to get his $20 isn't under constant threat for being a pizza guy when he's not working.

Go tell that to his family. Tell them that it's not that big of a deal since he got stabbed while working and sometimes he wasn't working and wasn't at risk.

Do hardcore brainswashed textbook liberals hear themselves when they are spouting nonsense?

A black person is always a black person and therefore always under threat from those who would target people based on race.

Some stats you might be interested in:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Especially this part:

Blacks are 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against whites then vice versa

Since you guys really love to play the race card, and put emphasis on race differences...

...who's the biggest threat to the other again?
 
Go tell that to his family. Tell them that it's not that big of a deal since he got stabbed while working and sometimes he wasn't working and wasn't at risk.

Do hardcore brainswashed textbook liberals hear themselves when they are spouting nonsense?



Some stats you might be interested in:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Especially this part:

Blacks are 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against whites then vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit a robbery.

Since you guys really love to play the race card, and put emphasis on race differences...

...who's the biggest threat to the other again?

If you are not interested in a discussion, just say so. I don't care about your stats...They don't change the point I was making. I don't know who "you guys" are. The point I was making doesn't only apply to race. If the pizza guy was attacked just because he was a pizza guy, and not because he was likely to have money to steal, I would consider that an additional aggravating factor too, although a less common one.

I can't believe I got singled out as some kind of wacko liberal for pointing out that if you commit a crime against someone only because of something inherent in them, it is enough of an aggravating factor in a crime to justify additional sanctions.

I think you come off sounding a little unhinged for attacking me and calling me names for having a difference of opinion. You are making a lot of assumptions that my point had anything to do with race specifically and you seem to feel that throwing out statistics that are completely irrelevant as some sort of "gotcha" against some imagined "liberal, race-card playing kook" that exists only in your head is some sort of victory for your perceived sound reasoning.

I think you are wrong on a certain point, say so, and you lose your mind...I wonder whose opinion seems well reasoned here?
 
In my mind you should punish the crime for what it is, regardless of the motivation. It's not worse to get stabbed because you're black or gay than getting stabbed because they want to steal your wallet. The pizza guy who got stabbed for $20 isn't less of a victim than the black guy who got stabbed because he's black, is he? Unless you really believe that one is worse than the other?

Having different classes of victims for the same crime is absolutely disgraceful.

The difference is the person stabbing someone because he's black HAS NO MOTIVE OTHER THAN HATE. A mugger steals from you because he wants to make a monetary profit. It's not right but it's not personal either. There is absolutely no reason to attack or discriminate against a person based on race. You don't seem to be able to grasp the concept of racial hatred.

Go tell that to his family. Tell them that it's not that big of a deal since he got stabbed while working and sometimes he wasn't working and wasn't at risk.

Do hardcore brainswashed textbook liberals hear themselves when they are spouting nonsense?



Some stats you might be interested in:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Especially this part:

Blacks are 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against whites then vice versa

Since you guys really love to play the race card, and put emphasis on race differences...

...who's the biggest threat to the other again?

A study done by a group called the New Century Foundation. An organization founded to study immigration and race relations so as to better understand the consequences of America's increasing diversity.

Sounds like a racist group to me.

You do realize the bottom line of these types of studies changes entirely depending on how you categorize the information.

These studies should include social and economic information. If you separated the crime rates into lower, middle and upper class you will likely find that the percentages change drastically. A person who takes a study like this and basis the information solely on race has a very narrow view of societal issues.
 
I see.
So the punch in the face is justified in one case and not in the other?

Let me tell you something, if some random guy passing by punches me or a loved one in the face, I want him to rot in jail for as long as possible. I don't give a shit about his "justification" or his "reason" behind it. Assault is assault. "Why" he did it is friggin' irrelevant. He punched an innocent person in the face, period.

You are WAY OFF TOPIC Balthazar!

Read the original post again
The question was why one pinishment is worse than the other. That I tried to answer
No one disagree with you that a crime may have been comitted

But it comes to mind if 2 bullies say white folks walks up to 2 white folks and each stabbged one
One died and one was admitted to hospital and released.

According to your logic then both should face murder charges?Morally you may be correct but for some strange reason it doesnt work here except in Calif where there would be no charges if the 2 stabbed parson were of a non liberal political party Sorry could not resist last sentence here
 
These studies should include social and economic information.

It's completely irrelevant considering that I was replying to:

A black person is always a black person and therefore always under threat from those who would target people based on race.

Stats show that when it comes to crime, white people should fear black people a lot more than the other way around. No if's, but's, justifications or any emotion invoved in this, just numbers. The background or motivation of the organization digging those stats is also irrelevant since these are public stats available to everyone. Again, I'm only interested in numbers.

Kindly note that I don't give a rat's ass about races, you are the one that brings this up. IMO race, gender or sexual orientation shouldn't play any role whatsoever when a crime is committed, neither negatively nor positively.
 
I think that sentences are more complex than just being matched to the severity of a crime. There also has to be a deterrent effect. The logic of having harsher penalties for hate related crimes is to show others that society on the whole wants to stamp it out. It's an unfortunate effect that when looked at another way, it seems to make it appear that stabbing a white man is less serious than the same offence committed against a black or Asian man. It isn't, it's just that the sentence is for the crime and to deter knife crime, whereas the harsher sentence has 3 elements, the crime, deterring knife crime, and deterring hate crime. Sentencing also takes into account the risk of reoffending, so someone who "hates" a particular minority group with sufficient vengeance that they will seek to attack members of said group needs to be kept behind bars for longer in order to protect others from his hate. Prison is also supposed to tackle such issues so that when released, the offender is not an immediate danger to others.

As for jokes about the Welsh, Scots, and English, they are seen as separate cultures, rather than separate races. There is less in the way of social pressure against this kind of humour, and as they are considered equals, can fight back. If you laugh at jokes about the Welsh and Scots, you have to accept that the Welsh and Scots laugh about jokes against the English (and they DO!!, and some are pretty damn funny as well:D)

However, the line is drawn where such humour is used to diminish the standing of a work colleague for example, so the merciless use of humour against the Irish can turn into racism if it causes distress to an Irish work colleage to the extent that they no longer feel equal to the others in the company.

Where I worked, we had a Welsh colleague, and he always had a Welsh flag on a stick for his desk. His response to light hearted banter was to come in with a far bigger Welsh flag on a stick, and have it tower over a diminutive symbol of England. We all got on well.

The problem with the English flag is that it has been hijacked by far right groups who are quite clearly racist. Showing the flag is therefore ambiguous, are you supporting the nation, or the far right view.
 
It's completely irrelevant considering that I was replying to:



Stats show that when it comes to crime, white people should fear black people a lot more than the other way around. No if's, but's, justifications or any emotion invoved in this, just numbers. The background or motivation of the organization digging those stats is also irrelevant since these are public stats available to everyone. Again, I'm only interested in numbers.

Kindly note that I don't give a rat's ass about races, you are the one that brings this up. IMO race, gender or sexual orientation shouldn't play any role whatsoever when a crime is committed, neither negatively nor positively.

Everything is relevant when you post stats. The stats don't show that white people should fear black people. The stats show that the percentage of crimes leans more toward a certain group. From there you can either make the assumption that the reason is that the group is black or ethnic or you can do more research to find out why these groups have a higher percentage. If you find that the majority of these crimes are in low income, inner city areas and your research shows that the population of these areas is predominantly black or ethnic then you have several new questions to ask. Is the cause of the increased crime rate because of race or is it a social and economical problem? And why are the low income areas predominantly black and ethnic in the first place? Is this another societal problem? Does this mean that white people should fear black people or does it mean any people should fear low income, inner city communities where the crime rate is higher? The problem with statistics like this is it tries to turn social problems into a math question and you can't just add up the numbers and come up with a correct answer. The simple fact is that the colour of a person's skin does not determine his or her disposition, mentality or intelligence.

And I knew immediately that this study you mentioned was done from a biased point of view. The organization was founded to study the CONSEQUENCES of America's increasing diversity not the EFFECTS. The group entered the research with a predetermined idea that America's increasing diversity was detrimental. That in itself is a racist stand point which renders the entire study moot.

I think that sentences are more complex than just being matched to the severity of a crime. There also has to be a deterrent effect. The logic of having harsher penalties for hate related crimes is to show others that society on the whole wants to stamp it out. It's an unfortunate effect that when looked at another way, it seems to make it appear that stabbing a white man is less serious than the same offence committed against a black or Asian man. It isn't, it's just that the sentence is for the crime and to deter knife crime, whereas the harsher sentence has 3 elements, the crime, deterring knife crime, and deterring hate crime. Sentencing also takes into account the risk of reoffending, so someone who "hates" a particular minority group with sufficient vengeance that they will seek to attack members of said group needs to be kept behind bars for longer in order to protect others from his hate. Prison is also supposed to tackle such issues so that when released, the offender is not an immediate danger to others.

As for jokes about the Welsh, Scots, and English, they are seen as separate cultures, rather than separate races. There is less in the way of social pressure against this kind of humour, and as they are considered equals, can fight back. If you laugh at jokes about the Welsh and Scots, you have to accept that the Welsh and Scots laugh about jokes against the English (and they DO!!, and some are pretty damn funny as well:D)

However, the line is drawn where such humour is used to diminish the standing of a work colleague for example, so the merciless use of humour against the Irish can turn into racism if it causes distress to an Irish work colleage to the extent that they no longer feel equal to the others in the company.

Where I worked, we had a Welsh colleague, and he always had a Welsh flag on a stick for his desk. His response to light hearted banter was to come in with a far bigger Welsh flag on a stick, and have it tower over a diminutive symbol of England. We all got on well.

The problem with the English flag is that it has been hijacked by far right groups who are quite clearly racist. Showing the flag is therefore ambiguous, are you supporting the nation, or the far right view.

Stabbing a white man isn't more serious than stabbing a black or Asian man unless the white man is stabbed because he's white. A hate crime is a hate crime and it doesn't matter if a black person hates white people or a Russian person hates Korean people it's all the same. If you paint a rock band's name on a synagogue you get charged with vandalism. If you paint swastika on a synagogue it's a hate crime and you will be punished accordingly. A hate crime is a whole new ballgame. I fully agree with the additional punishment. If you stab someone you get charged for assault. If you stab someone because of race (among other things) you get charged with assault and you get charged with hate crimes as well.

I have friends and coworkers from more races than I care to count. I can make race related jokes with them but I would never seriously insult their race. Some of the smartest and most productive people I've ever worked with were black, Vietnamese, Russian, Polish and Newfie (yes, I know it's not a race but it should be.)

I was warming a spicy Jamaican patty in the microwave a while back and a couple of Jamaican guys I work with came in the lunch room. One of them was wearing one of those big Jamaican Rasta hats.
The other one says "Oh, those are good."
I said "I know they're good 'cause they say 'Ya Mon!' on the box." (They really do. lol)
The Rasta hat guy says "I can't eat them, they're hard on my stomach."
I said "You can't eat Jamaican patties?"
He says "No."
I said to the other guy "Do you still respect him?"
He says "No, mon."
I said "You hold him down, I'll take his hat."

The big Russian I work with started telling me a story. He said "Before I moved here when I worked for the -" and I cut him off and said "KGB?" And he said "F*** off" and continued with his story. :p

Nobody tries to hide the fact that we're not all the same race. That's the way it should be. It's ok for people to be different. It makes the world a much more interesting place.
 
The law is designed to attempt to reduce the likely hood of behavior. If a group is experiencing an increase in crime the law will be changed to address it.

For example. We were experiencing and still are actually an insanely high amount of copper thefts. The law was changed to prosecute it as a felony offense, no matter the amount. Before it was changed you would get charged for the amount you stole. Due to the increase in daily thefts from various businesses, houses, etc, they changed it to make people think twice.

The law is designed to reduce the amount of hate crimes because of their heinous nature, and the increase of events we have experienced in the nation. When you have a gruesome act, you don't simply say "well murder is murder." The same with the rape law, with the increase in rapes against children or the elderly.

As you said it's not about emotion, it's about reducing the number of incidents.

Does it work, in some cases yes. In some no. But I'm all ears if you can offer up a way to deter hate crime.

And yes if those poor pizza delivery guys were experiencing an increase in attacks on their person, the law will change, and if not people can lobby for the change to make it an enhancement for whatever offense was committed if it was committed against a pizza delivery guy / girl.
 
Go tell that to his family.

Just for the record, I have talked to many of those family's first hand after the incident occurred at the ground level. In my experience they do feel more violated and express concerns as such when a member of their family was singled out because of bias.
 
The law is designed to attempt to reduce the likely hood of behavior.

If it works to save people from racist attacks, why wouldn't it work as well for the pizza guy? You guys are ultimately placing one human life above the other.

For the record, I'd react the exact same if a white person was victim of a hate crime and the pizza guy was black.
 
While pizza delivers aren't offered any special protection, police officers and prison guards are in Canada.

Murder while committing a felony (theft in this case) does carry higher penalties too.

There's been a push to impose special protections for taxi drivers here, they are particularly vunerable to attacks and murder.
 
If it works to save people from racist attacks, why wouldn't it work as well for the pizza guy? You guys are ultimately placing one human life above the other.

For the record, I'd react the exact same if a white person was victim of a hate crime and the pizza guy was black.

Because the law isn't a blanket and can't be applied as such.

Every crime has a level of mental culpability that needs to be met or proven, unless noted. So recklessly, knowingly, intentionally, and / or criminal negligence (Texas). The bias laws fits within the same realm. Let's put this into real world application as so many these days like to talk about what they feel:

Remove all levels, and simply state a crime is a crime. Doesn't matter the reason why it was committed. If you apply that logic to the hate crimes it has to be applied to all crimes. We don't dig into the reasoning or any other parameters in regards to a crime being committed. We won't pick and choose so to speak, as it wouldn't be fair, don't want to value one person any higher or lower than another.

Ok, crime is a crime. That means I should have arrested the 13 year old kid I dealt with last night, and, charged him with felony possession of child pornography. 13 year old female sends a picture of her chest to another 13 year old. The 13 year old then stupidly sent it to a friend, and it stopped there. So he just committed a felony. We won't worry about the intent behind the crime. Here is where officer discretion comes into play. So with the felony charge, he also now would need to register as a sex offender. That list of course follows him the better part of his life. Someone does a search for sex offenders in their area and his name will pop up, right along side the person who raped 5 different kids. The law is the law though and he broke it, and it must be applied the same.

There are a wide range of assault offenses, as well as methods of carrying them out. Any unwanted touching is assault and you can be arrested. If I touch you on your shoulder to apologize for something, and you weren't ready to talk it out, I just assaulted you. Makes sense for me to now not only be in jail, but to be in for the same amount of time as the person who punched someone. And for the record I've made those arrest for silly assaults under various circumstances. Not the best feeling in the world having to apply the law like one big blanket.

Same logic applies to why everyone doesn't get a ticket when they break a traffic law, or doesn't get arrested for that matter. You can be arrested for any traffic violation outside of speeding, and open container (in Texas). That means I can arrest you for failing to use your turn signal, not coming to a complete stop at a signal for a right turn, or simply not signally continuously for a 100' prior to your turn. I can arrest your for your inspection sticker being a month out, or your license plate being partially obstructed. Many others of course. The law is setup as a tool to deal with certain situations and incidents that occur. I've actually had to fall back on the traffic law to arrest people and get them off the road for various reasons (no not all simply DWI). Because I've done that using your logic, I need to now start arresting anyone who breaks those traffic laws, and charging max penalty on them. Law is the law and crime is a crime. Everyone needs to be punished the same.

Not only would that not be logically, it really wouldn't be fair, as the punishment would certainly not fit the crimes. Someone with that mindset would make for a very poor Police Officer, or Law Enforcement Officer. Law in some areas are fairly blank and white, but still can't be applied as such, which is also why it constantly evolves.
 
Now she's dumped her long standing legal team and hired one that "specializes in defending clients in employment discrimination cases and consulting clients on best practices in corporate diversity."

It would be cheaper if she just learned to keep her foot out of her mouth.
 
You know what , this has become more than insane , Yes the woman made a mistake and said I am sorry to the world public, she has lost a vast fortune and her reputation and is trying to make up for it in her own weird way I guess.

We all Fxck up in some way or other , no ones perfect and will never be as a society, we can only learn from our past and any future mistakes we may encounter.

It needs to start with our younger generation before they get tainted by TV and social media groups and peers in school , bring them up to respect human rights, empathy and treating thy neighbor the way you would want to be treated yourself, it has always been the Golden rule that my parents taught me and I passed on to my children and I dearly hope they do the same with my grandchildren.

Laurie
 
We all Fxck up in some way or other , no ones perfect and will never be as a society, we can only learn from our past and any future mistakes we may encounter.

I agree. Some mistakes are just a lot more expensive than others.
 
You know what , this has become more than insane , Yes the woman made a mistake and said I am sorry to the world public, she has lost a vast fortune and her reputation and is trying to make up for it in her own weird way I guess.

We all Fxck up in some way or other , no ones perfect and will never be as a society, we can only learn from our past and any future mistakes we may encounter.

It needs to start with our younger generation before they get tainted by TV and social media groups and peers in school , bring them up to respect human rights, empathy and treating thy neighbor the way you would want to be treated yourself, it has always been the Golden rule that my parents taught me and I passed on to my children and I dearly hope they do the same with my grandchildren.

Laurie
Right on Amen to that.
 
Humans

You know what , this has become more than insane , Yes the woman made a mistake and said I am sorry to the world public, she has lost a vast fortune and her reputation and is trying to make up for it in her own weird way I guess.

We all Fxck up in some way or other , no ones perfect and will never be as a society, we can only learn from our past and any future mistakes we may encounter.

It needs to start with our younger generation before they get tainted by TV and social media groups and peers in school , bring them up to respect human rights, empathy and treating thy neighbor the way you would want to be treated yourself, it has always been the Golden rule that my parents taught me and I passed on to my children and I dearly hope they do the same with my grandchildren.

Laurie

Unfortunately, today's media promote wrong values and life models. No one can change that as long as we don't change.

Regarding the human rights, empathy and so on... a human being is built as an ultimate biological killing machine ( brain's fault) and the only things that stops us from acting likewise are a set of social rules ( the social contract) and the beliefs in a supernatural entity that will punish us if we do something ... antisocial. The religion was created for an "hygienic" and peacekeeping purpose.

During the entire (proved or recorded) history of the mankind there were only few years of total peace and thousands of years of major or minor wars.

On topic: I don't think that calling someone a cracker or nigger or yellow, or red, blue, green and the rest of the colours should represent the spark of a war or a reason for murders or aggressions. At least not for the adults.
 
I wish real issues could be addressed instead of rushing to (witch hunt)someone for a word that as was earlier stated many of us have used if we are honest about it.Its getting to be toooooo much and im tired of always having to bite my tongue around family members if i dont agree with their views.If the truth is known the media does hype up alot of things just to have something to keep covering.Enough already.My family consists of Indian100%( my grandmother),black,spanish (my moms sister),white and im not talking about down the generations but as close as aunts and uncles.My oldest son is bi racial(white and black).If i sit and take sides with whoevers gripping about what at the time i would go crazy.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Accredited Casinos

Read about our rating system and how it's done.
Back
Top